Tag Archives: Media Watch

A „TURKEY SHOOT“ FOR ERDOGAN

We all have to be courageous, despite all of this, and defend the freedom of the press and the freedom to information.”

Can Dündar, May 2016 ( a lone voice)

Dündar sentenced GuardianIf any doubts still existed about the allegation that our „churnalists“ have lost their capacity (or will) to think for themselves, the recent reporting about the conviction of two courageous Turkish journalists is the proof that you no longer need a functioning brain to work for the media.

I am referring here to the Guardian but you might pick any other more or less reputable newspaper or TV-News in Europe (including RT), it does not really matter since they all „report“ the same story anyway.

So what are the facts?

  • Two Turkish journalists were sentenced to several years in prison last week
  • One of them is Can Dündar, editor-in-chief of the Turkish daily Cumhuriyet (5 years and 10 month); the other is Erdem Gül, chief of Cumhurriyet’s Ankara bureau (5 years)
  • The court ruled that their crime was: „procuring and revealing state secrets that could harm the security of the state or its domestic or foreign interests“ (both were acquitted on espionage and terrorism charges)
  • The greatest joke of it all is that wannabe Sultan Erdogan joined the trial with the complaint that (reporting the inconvenient truth about a criminal state) amounts to „an attempt to undermine Turkey’s global standing / international reputation“.

If you take a closer look how the Guardian has presented the story  you might note the following:

The last paragraph is supposed to be evidence for the Guardian’s „balanced“ reporting which works like this:

First you mention the „revelations“ of Cumhurriyet which „PURPORTED to show Turkey’s state intelligence agency ferrying weapons into Syria in 2014“. This phrasing implies of course that there is no proof for these allegations. They might or might not be true.

Then you dutifully „report“ what the accused has to say (in this case of course President Erdogan):

Regarding the video, the president has acknowledged that the lorries, which were stopped by Turkish paramilitary forces and police officers en route to the Syrian border, belonged to the intelligence agency, but he said they were CARRYING AID to Turkmen rebels in Syria. Turkmen fighters are battling against the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, and Isis.“

But this is not quite accurate.

THE CHANGING DENIALS

The fact of the matter is that the official response to the revelations by Cumhurriyet changed several times and this inconsistency is (as every criminal investigator knows) a clear sign that someone is lying.

The Turkish newspaper TODAY’S ZAMAN (English version) reported this on May 31, 2015 (the site has since been shut down – no big surprise):

„Turkish government officials have often provided conflicting accounts on the contents of intercepted Syria-bound trucks.

When the news broke in January 2014 that the Turkish military intercepted three trucks and searched their contents under the order of the lead and district prosecutors in Adana province, the government immediately dismissed the claims that the trucks were carrying arms. Prime Minister Davutoğlu, who was foreign minister at the time of the incident, asserted that the cargo was humanitarian aid destined for the embattled Syrian Turkmens on the other side of the border.

 Then-Prime Minister and now President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said on television programs as well as during his public speeches that the trucks were carrying aid to Turkmens. Then-Interior Minister Efkan Ala also said the aid was for Turkmens and a public statement by MİT also claimed the same.

Testimonials by gendarmerie intelligence officers who were involved in the interception confirmed, however, that the shipment’s destination was not an area that included any Turkmen group. The destination on the Syrian side of the border, as disclosed by the drivers, was often a target of reconnaissance by Turkish military personnel who secured the border.

However, the gendarmes said the area was populated by radical groups including al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

Syrian Turkmens also refuted claims that they had received either arms or humanitarian aid from Turkey at the time. Syrian-Turkmen Assembly Vice Chairman Hussein al-Abdullah said in January 2014 that no such trucks arrived from Turkey.

Earlier this month, Yasin Aktay, the AK Party’s deputy chairman responsible for foreign affairs, admitted that the trucks were in fact transporting arms, but said that the receiver was the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which is fighting against the Syrian government, not ISIL.

On the other hand, İbrahim Kalın, spokesman and adviser to President Erdoğan, claimed Turkey has never sent any weaponry to Syria.“

TELEGRAM-STYLE SUMMARY OF STATEMENTS

  • GOVERNMENT (#1): NO ARMS IN TRUCKSONLY „AID“ – FOR TURKMEN TRIBE
  • GOVERNMENT (#2): YES, ARMS IN TRUCKS BUT FOR TURKMEN ONLY (DAVUTOĞLU )
  • GOVERNMENT (#3): YES, ARMS IN TRUCKS BUT FOR FSA ONLY (AK party chairman)
  • GOVERNMENT (#4): NO, NEVER ANY WEAPONS SENT TO SYRIA (Erdogan spokesman)
  • GENDARMERIE (which searched the trucks): DESTINATION OF CARGO AN AREA WHERE NO TURKMEN ARE FOUNDAREA UNDER CONTROL OF  JIHADIS (IS and Al Nusra)
  • TURKMEN LEADER: NO AID OR ARMS RECEIVED AT THAT TIME („NO SUCH TRUCKS ARRIVED“) FROM TURKEY

So the editors of the Guardian conveniently ignored these conflicting  assertions. It makes life as a journalist so much easier.

Besides, the material Cumhurriyet published on May 29 clearly demonstrates that these lorries DID actually CARRY weapons for war (and lots of them): It showed gendarmerie and police officers opening crates on the back of the trucks on the way to Syria in January 2014. The officials first opened cardboard boxes marked as “fragile” and full of antibiotics. But what did they find hidden under those boxes?

According to the paper, the trucks were carrying six steel containers, with 1,000 artillery shells, 50,000 machine gun rounds, 30,000 heavy machine gun rounds and 1,000 mortar shells. The arms were reportedly delivered to extremist groups fighting against the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad, whom Ankara wants ousted from power.“ (Source: RT)

How did the Erdogan Government react to the „accusation“? (sending weapons to brutal Jihadis in Syria)

 „The Turkish government has vehemently denied claims that it is arming rebels fighting in Syria and accused dozens of prosecutors, soldiers and security officers involved in searching the trucks of attempting to bring it down through such claims.

[Why is the stigma-word „crazy conspiracy theory“ not used for Erdogan here when it is perfectly applicable ?]

Turkey accused of arms smuggling  to Syria

 Earlier this month, Turkey arrested four prosecutors who ordered the search of the vehicles near the Syrian border in January 2014 and they are now in prison pending trial.

 More than 30 security officers involved in the interception also face charges including military espionage and attempting to overthrow the government. The footage published on the opposition Cumhuriyet daily’s website on Friday shows inspectors searching a metallic container watched by security officers, a prosecutor and sniffer dogs.“ (Daily Mail)

Sultan ErdoganThat the megalomaniac Erdogan („a great friend“ of the US according to Joe Biden) would harass journalists who exposed his crimes comes as no surprise.  That the abuse of power of this narcissistic wannabe „Sultan“ goes so far that even prosecutors and police officers will be gagged and threatened with ridiculous charges is even more scandalous  but apparently our press does not care …(they just focus on the journalists).

THERE IS MASSIVE EVIDENCE FOR TURKEYS ROLE IN SUPPORTING TERRORIST GANGS IN SYRIA

Two reports from German media  (2014) show that hundreds of lorries cross the border between Turkey and Syria every day and a truck driver confirmed: „most of the freight here does go to the regions under IS control“ („to Ahmed in Raqqa“). Conclusion of the German journalists:  „It seems Islamic state does not have to worry about its supply lines“ (Deutsche Welle).

The second video clip (How Turkey arms and sends Wahabi Jihadis to Syria) is even more explicit, among its key findings:

Turkish locals confirm that their government provides medical treatment for the Jihadis, allows them to enter Syria freely, and that there are direct weapons deliveries to Syria

  • Turkish opposition in parlament also condemns Erdogan for „bringing thousands of foreign fighters from 40 countries to Syria“. (Erdogan’s response : „Spreading lies will be punished“)
  • „German soldiers are there (with Patriot missiles – in the meantime they have been removed) to protect a state* which is fuelling the conflict in Syria.“ Does the German government know this? (Of course, they do … Sykes-Picot 2.0 has apparently become Sykes-Merkel-Picot)
  • ( * the „analysis“ of Turkey’s intention by the ICC shown in the video is BS as was the absurd notion that the aggressor Turkey needs protection from Syria  )

There are hundreds of other reports corroborating the „allegation“  that Turkey plays a key role in supporting Al Nusra, IS and other artificial Jihadis (see LINKS at the end of this article) so the material Cumhurriyet published fits perfectly into this political context.

BidenEven Vice-President Joe Biden confirmed in his Harvard speech (lamenting the problems with US-allies in the region)  that „his great friends“ in Turkey (aided and abetted by the insufferable Saudis and of course with Washington „leading -to the slaughter- from behind“)

were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war – what did they do?“

They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, THOUSANDS OF TONS OF WEAPONS into anyone who would fight gainst Assad — except THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE BEING SUPPLIED, WERE AL-NUSRA, AND AL-QAEDA, and the extremist elements of jihadis who were coming from other parts of the world.“

So there is no doubt at all that the „allegations“ of Cumhurriyet are in fact revelations based on facts.  Are our journalists suffering from political autism or do they just not care? (People are dying because the press covers-up for crimes against humanity in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, etc.)

Even more bizarre is the zigzag line of argumentation used by Erdogan to justify his crackdown on the two journalists who are not under his control:

  • „Slander“: claim that footage and information published by Dündar are „not factual“: „fabricated evidence
  • Illegitimate operation against the MIT“ = espionage and „violating confidentiality“ (!)
  • Clandestine collaboration with (former ally and CIA protegé) Fetullah Gülen to „create the impression“ that Turkey helps terrorist organisations
  • Original charges: Espionage and Treason

„The Turkish authorities denied the allegations, saying that the trucks were carrying aid to Syrian ethnic Turkmen tribespeople and labeled their interception an act of “treason” and “espionage“. (RT)

This is of course practically the same silly „refutation“ the Guardian published as context for the recent verdict (see my comments above). But if the trucks carried only „aid“ why is there a need for secrecy?

And if the evidence is allegedly „fabricated“ (the original claim by Erdogan and the state prosecutor in Istanbul) then how can you justify a verdict of „revealing a state secret“?

The fact that members of the local gendarmerie (who had been involved in the operation and were therefore eyewitnesses) were also charged with „espionage“ and even four district attorneys were deposed (put into custody) to stop any independent investigation in Adana province tells the whole story …(What has happened to them? Does anybody care?) …

Turkey IS flagsIn fact everybody with half a brain (and basic knowledge of geopolitics) has figured out by now that Turkey DOES support “Islamist” terror-gangs (not only) in Syria (Russia has provided additional evidence) but the Guardian editors prefer to look the other way. This shameful behaviour by our journalists is not new  and one could rant for hours about it but my point here is the following:

If you use basic logic you will see that the verdict actually PROVES that the story Cumhurriyet published is TRUE. Why?

By charging them for „revealing state secrets“ they inadvertently admit that the story about transporting weapons  clandestinely to Syria  (under the protection of the MIT, Turkish intelligence and under the guise of „humanitarian relief“ ) must be true.

This is precisely  the „state secret“ the world was not supposed to know.

If the lorries had only transported „aid“ then how could that be a „state secret“ in the first place? The whole thing is completely absurd.

Turkeys Killing Machine synthetic Gladio terror(On the criminal role of the MIT  (a creature of the CIA) and the „Gladio“ context see this article and  Daniele Ganser)

In order to divert attention from this logical conclusion the Erdogan cabal arranged for a „shooting“ outside the court shortly before the verdict was announced.

This way they could be sure that all „news“ would concentrate on the spectacular violent event instead of understanding what the verdict really confirmed: the guilt of the Erdogan government as a major supporter of terrorist gangs in Syria.

So wordings like these are no longer justified

The journalists were prosecuted over a report ALLEGING Turkey had tried to ship arms to Islamists in Syria.“ (CPJ)

The case, which is widely viewed as a test for press freedom in Turkey, relates to the pair’s reports on ALLEGED government arms smuggling to Syria.“ (AP

but  the „churnalists“ use them because they do not have the courage to print the truth while lamenting the loss of „press freedom“ in Turkey.

They do not have the guts to show real solidarity with Cumhuriyet journalists by insisting on the truth (although they do not have to go to jail for it).

It makes you sick.

Press freedom

LINKS to more Information about

  1. Erdogan’s autocratic rule

2. The criminal role of Turkey in the destruction of Syria

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/business/2013/09/syria-factories-dismantled-resold-turkey.html

https://youtu.be/uOSUh87WA20 (Plundering Syrian factories)

through artifical „Islamist“ terror  (the ludicrous distinction between „moderate rebels“ and the head-choppers is of course a complete farce):

EXKLUSIVE: Secret Turkish Nerve Center leads aid to Syria rebels

NATO member Turkey harboring Terrorists

 “Most of the fighters who joined us in the beginning of the war came via Turkey, and so did our equipment and supplies.”

ISIS-Commander to Washington Post, August 2014; here is an excerpt from this article:

 REYHANLI, Turkey — Before their blitz into Iraq earned them the title of the Middle East’s most feared insurgency, the jihadists of the Islamic State treated this Turkish town near the Syrian border as their own personal shopping mall.

And eager to aid any and all enemies of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Turkey rolled out the red carpet.

In dusty market stalls, among the baklava shops and kebab stands, locals talk of Islamist fighters openly stocking up on uniforms and the latest Samsung smartphones. Wounded jihadists from the Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front — an al-Qaeda offshoot also fighting the Syrian government — were treated at Turkish hospitals. Most important, the Turks winked as Reyhanli and other Turkish towns became way stations for moving foreign fighters and arms across the border.”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelweiss/100159613/syrian-rebels-say-turkey-is-arming-and-training-them/

 

(Next: Part 2 of „What is Zionism“?)

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Europe, Foreign Policy, Politics, Uncategorized

when words become weapons

(A plea of “Not guilty”for Ken Livingstone)

Myths Rose„Zionism“ is a word that is never mentioned in the German media  but „Anti-Semitism“ is always present in the public domain, like an invisible landmine, ready to be used against people who tread the forbidden path (defending Palestinian rights and seeking justice based on „clinging to truth“, a basic principle of Gandhi in his resistance against British rule).

The sordid history of Zionism (supposedly an emancipatory movement striving for freedom and self-determination of Jews in a “national home”), how it signed up to Western imperialism , its core elements of racism and religious superstition,  is constantly being blacked out, erased from our minds.

Anybody daring to mention the collaboration between Zionists and Hitler’s Third Reich will get hammered by the Thought-Police and our fawning media is happy to help them with the job.

HOW “ANTI-SEMITIC” IS THE LABOUR PARTY?  (wrong question)

A shocking example for this is the recent treatment Ken Livingstone received from David Mellor on LBC Radio who treated him like a naughty child and demanded repeatedly an apology for mentioning Hitler and Zionism in the same breath.

The British media immediately joined the Zionist bandwagon by doing nothing to question the claim of “antisemitism” , calling Livingstone’s words “inflammatory” and  agreeing that the Labour party has been “tainted” by his remarks.

Greenslade on Livingstone Apparently fuelled by moral indignation and the illusion of intellectual superiority, Roy Greenslade  (a professor of journalism!) wrote a scathing comment in The Guardian:

“Has Ken Livingstone lost the plot? Can he not see that what he said about Hitler and Zionism was utterly barmy? Does he not realise that his remarks were an historical nonsense?”

No Sir, Ken Livingstone has not „lost it“ and his remarks were not „historical nonsense“ either.  He did not say that Hitler was a Zionist but meant that Nazi-Germany and Zionism had overlapping interests which may sound shocking but is no surprise for those who stick to the historical facts.

I think the man deserves a lot of respect for having the guts to stand up for the (forbidden) truth even if  the British fawning media (while enabling mass murder in Syria, Yemen and Iraq) come down on him like a ton of bricks.

Why should anyone be sorry “for mentioning Hitler”?  Because “he is such a toxic person”? This is the most absurd notion I have heard on public radio.

 I’m not going to apologise for telling the truth“  (Ken Livingstone on LBC Radio)

Instead of checking what the historical facts about the relation between Zionism and the Third Reich really are, the “churnalists” eagerly focus on the “anti-semitic” label and how it will damage Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party, knowing full-well that Livingstone’s claim  about a „well-orchestrated campaign by the Israel lobby to smear anybody who criticises Israel policy as antisemitic” is true.

 „You are a disgusting racist, a Nazi apologist…“.

(John Mann reprimanding Ken Livingstone in front of a film crew which “happened” to be there …)

This heavily publicized display of moral outrage (staged by Labour MP John Mann for “bringing the party into disrepute”) against Ken Livingstone was even more proof of how subservient British politicians have become to Zionism and the quasi-fascist Israeli government.

Claiming Hitler was a Zionist is not only a huge historical perversion, but it directly equates Nazism and Zionism. It suggests they share objectives and values; it is guilt by association. It is hard to think of a more offensive linkage.“

(Rabbi Danny Rich, member of the Labour party, quoted in the Guardian)

Zionism BrennerBut the historical record is clear on this: Yes, the Zionists DID collaborate with Nazi-Germany for their political goals (even when the Holocaust became evident in 1941).  Here are a few examples:

ZIONISM DID NOTHING TO FIGHT FOR THE RIGHTS OF JEWS  (AS EQUAL CITIZENS)

The following statements (excerpts) are from the Zionist federation of Germany, published on June 21, 1933 shortly after Hitler came to power. In it it proposes to help the state with the “solution of the Jewish question” and finds that Nazi-Germany and Zionism have common interests:

ZIONISM  ACCEPTED  THE RACIST  DISCRIMINATION  IN  NAZI-GERMANY (and found it useful)

 “Zionism believes that a rebirth of national life, such as is occuring in Germany through  adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life.“

 They offer proposals  “on the regulation of the situation of the Jews in the new German state .. which pave the way for a real solution of the Jewish question that will satisfy the German state. […] We are not concerend with the fate of individual jews who have lost their  economic and social positions as a result of Germany’s profund transformation. […] On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit our community into the total structure .. so that for us too, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible.” (They go on to say that they believe  in “the bold resoluteness of the new Germany in handling the Jewish question,  in “taking decisive steps toward overcoming the Jewish problem” …)

 Under the header “relationship to the German people” one can read:

 “We, too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group and reject any trespasses of the cultural domain … we believe in the possibility of an honest relationship of loyalty between a group-conscious Jewry and the German state”.

[To this day “mixed marriage” is illegal in Israel as it was under Hitler in Germany …. where is the moral outrage?]

So it should come as no surprise that under “Emigration” we find the following statement:

“For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish question not sentimentalities are involved but a real problem, whose solution interests all peoples … especially the German people.

 The realization of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda (then being carried out in the US) is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle …”

 (Yet it was clear from the beginning that the colonization of Palestine was impossible without massive violence against the native Arab population as Vladimir Jabotinsky openly admitted in his “Iron Wall” and as we have now seen for decades.)

They then go on to say that their “solution” to the Jewish question would “entail important advantages for the German people” .. and that the idea of nationhood would “undergo a decisive deepending by a statesmanlike action on the part of the new Germany”.

ZIONISM  CREATES  THE  MYTH  OF  A  JEWISH NATION  (BASED ON  THE BLOOD & SOIL IDEOLOGY OF THE NAZIS)

If the position of the Jews in Germany should be “regulated through recognition of their special character” this would “advance the German principles of nationality”.  The Zionists even go so far as to acknowledge that “the abnormal situation of the Jews” lead to “scarcely tolerable conditions for other peoples” (!).

They end with the hope that the German Government will have “full understanding” for their “clear posture” (regarding the Jewish question) because it “harmonizes with the interests of the [fascist] state”.

At the September 1935 National Socialist Party Congress, the Reichstag adopted the so-called “Nuremberg laws” that prohibited marriages and sexual relations between Jews and Germans and, in effect, proclaimed the Jews an „alien“ minority nationality. A few days later the Zionist Jüdische Rundschau was not outraged but editorially welcomed the new measures:

Germany … is meeting the demands of the World Zionist Congress when it declares the Jews now living in Germany to be a national minority. Once the Jews have been stamped a national minority it is again possible to establish normal relations between the German nation and Jewry. The new laws give the Jewish minority in Germany its own cultural life, its own national life. In future it will be able to shape its own schools, its own theatre, and its own sports associations. In short, it can create its own future in all aspects of national life …“

MILITANT ZIONISTS  OFFER  TO FIGHT  FOR  THE  THIRD  REICH

Stern com stampEven more shocking is a letter from underground Zionist terrorist leader Avraham Stern (received by the German embassy in Ankara) proposing in January 1941 (when the “Endloesung” was already in sight and  the “Stern Gang” now regarded Britain as their main enemy) “the active participation of the NMO [Lehi] in the war on the side of Germany in exchange for Nazi help in creating a “Jewish state.”

Here are the most appalling statements:

The Zionist military leaders acknowledge that  “solving the Jewish question” once and for all  means a “Jew-free” Europe:

However, the only way this can be totally achieved is through settlement of these masses in the homeland of the Jewish people, Palestine, and by the establishment of a Jewish state in its historical boundaries.

The NMO, which is very familiar with the good will of the German Reich government and its officials towards Zionist activities within Germany and the Zionist emigration program, takes that view that:

  1. Common interests can exist between a European New Order based on the German concept and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as embodied by the NMO.
  2. Cooperation is possible between the New (fascist) Germany and a renewed, folkish-national Jewry [Hebräertum].
  3. The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of maintaining and strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East.“ […]

Brenner 51 DocumentsTalk about sucking up to Hitler. For more documents proving Zionist collaboration with the Nazis try these books)

N.B. These Zionists DO NOT CONDEMN the grave injustices the Third Reich imposed on Jews (and political opponents). On the contrary, they see these measures as conducive for their own plans: to “encourage” (even coerce) as many Jews a possible to emigrate to Palestine (thus loading the “Jewish question” on the Palestinian Arabs who were going to suffer extreme injustices for decades as a result).

 “If I knew that it was possible to save all the [Jewish] children of Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second.”

(future Israeli President David Ben-Gurion, quoted by  Israeli historian Tom Segev)

ZIONISM IS OBSESSED WITH CREATING A JEWISH MAJORITY IN PALESTINE (using criminal and immoral means to get there)

But the majority of educated European Jews (especially in the West) did not want to leave their home countries since their national identity was German, French, etc. and they lead  a fairly good life (until the Nazis arrived).  The situation of the Eastern Jews was totally different: many of them lived in poverty, in filthy ghettoes and under the command of the “Talmudic” rabbis who encouraged the segregation from the inferior “goyim”.  These people became the nucleus of “Israel” and even after the Holocaust most Western, liberal Jews wanted to go to the US, not Israel so the Zionists had to use brutal methods of intimidation (and deception) to get the “human material” they needed for their artificial “homeland”.

shadow holocaust GrodzinskyThey infiltrated the DP-camps after the war in order to “persuade” survivors to emigrate to Palestine.  A recruitment campaign in these camps (to get enough fighters for  the planned assault against the Palestinians) resulted in only 0,3 % of  the male DPs as volunteers.  So a compulsory draft was necessary.

 This bizarre project – in which a non-nation state imposed compulsory military service on people who had never even lived in the land for which they were required to fight – was enforced through a number of mechanisms, including publishing black lists of “draft evaders”, firing them from jobs, evicting them from dwellings, withdrawing their food rations, and beating them. These tactics were also at times used on their relatives.”

 (Source: Alison Weir, Against our better Judgement, p. 79  with reference to Grodzinsky: Shadow of the Holocaust – see also the quote below)

This is a shocking affair. Several thousand sick, malnourished, and vulnerable orphans, still at great risk, were forced by the Zionists to stay in the [German] camps, even though arrangements were made for them to arrive to safety in England and France. The rest of this tragedy constitutes chapter 4 of my book.”

They also “retrieved” Jewish children (often against their will, in tears) who had been rescued by compassionate people during the war and put them into orphanages run by the “Jewish Brigade”.  A search for relatives was not allowed to avoid the risk that the children might want to stay in Europe.  They needed to be turned into good little Zionists so they had to learn (and speak only) Hebrew and  internalize the myth of the “promised land”.

WHAT  JEWISH  PEOPLE?

Shlomo Sand InventionAs Shlomo Sand has shown in his book, the idea of a “Jewish people” is a complete fantasy. The ancestors of most “Israelis” (immigrants from Eastern Europe and Russia) were the Khazars, a Mongolian tribe* who collectively converted to Judaism (by decree of its ruler) in the 8th century. They never set foot on the “Holy Land” and had absolutely no connection to biblical “Juda” or “Israel”.

(*Names like “Kagan”, “Kahane” or “Cohen”  are variations of the Mongolian word for ruler: Khan )

ZIONISM IS OBSESSED WITH RACIAL PURITY

Keep that in mind when you read about Jabotinsky’s emphatic insistence on  “preserving racial purity” as an absolute condition for saving “the special, national character” of Jews.  Accoding to  him, this must be done “at all costs” which means (planned) racial segregation and ethnic cleansing are “necessary” so that the “Jewish bloodline” will not be “diluted” by mixed marriages and in order to make “Jews” the majority “race”  in Palestine / Israel.

So we already see, that this is a mirror-image of the “blood and soil” ideology of the Nazis and Hitler did the Zionists a huge favour by fostering the myth that “Jews” are a race when there is only Judaism as a religion. Since Jews are not a “nation”, they do not need a “national home” either. This was just another devilish exercise of “divide et impera”.

ZIONISM IS BASED ON A BIG LIE

The whole thing (“Jewish national integrity” and “spiritual energy” bound to the “promised land”) was completely fabricated and part of a sinister political game which included support for the Nazis and the Bolsheviks by the same power circles  in order to destroy  geo-political rivals Germany and Russia by turning them (twice) against each other.  (Britain’s role in this diabolical game –  see Preparata: Conjuring Hitler)

Opponents of Zionism  fought for the rights of Jews in their different countries but rejected the idea of putting thousands of Jews in a foreign Muslim country, like a dagger into the heart of the Arab world.

Gandhi articulated this attitude in 1938 with the following  words of wisdom:

My sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice.The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after return to Palestine.

Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood? Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct.

The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred.”

ZIONISM: THE FORBIDDEN MEMORY (COMPARISON WITH  FASCISM AND HITLER)

By looking at the assessments of contemporary witnesses, who experienced the growing political power of Zionism (especially in the US and Britain), the creation of Israel and who were appalled by the  unscrupulous  behaviour of its leaders, we gain further insight into the true spirit of Zionism:

Sir John Munro Troutbeck (1894-1971), head of the British Middle East Office in Cairo and later ambassador to Iraq, wrote in a letter to Churchill on May 18, 1948 – shortly after the creation of “the state of Israel”:

 “It is difficult not to see that Zionist policy is anything else than unashamed aggression carried out by methods of deceit and brutality not unworthy of Hitler”

Quoted by William Roger Louis in The British Empire in the Middle East 1945-1951, p.576 (1986)

So Ken Livingstone has no reason to apologize for putting Zionism and Nazism in a moral context (not as morally “equal” but as dangerous ideologies with a racist, supremacist core) . Even the most horrific Nazi atrocities cannot and must not serve as a moral fig-leaf for Zionist crimes (committed so soon after the “Holocaust”).

On 2 June 1948, Sir John Troutbeck sent another diplomatic message, this time to the British foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin. In it he complains that

the Americans are responsible for the creation of a gangster state“ headed by “an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders“.

REMORSELESS  ZIONIST TERRORISM: „FREEDOM FIGHTERS“ IN ACTION

Bernadotte murderThe context for these condemnations were of course the numerous attacks committed by Zionist terrorists against British officials:  e.g. the assassination of Lord Moyne in Cairo (November 6, 1944) or the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946. The assassination of UN-envoy Count Folke Bernadotte in 1948 is perhaps the most despicable political murder the Zionist gangs committed at that time. (Regarding the abominable crimes against the Palestinians – see below)

While the British government and military have not been unfamiliar with terrorist methods for their own purposes, it must be pointed out that the most famous Zionist terrorist „masterminds“ are unique in one respect: they have never been held to account for their crimes and later even became Prime Minister of Israel (Menachim Begin and Yitzak Shamir).

The remains of two Jewish assassins (hanged in 1945 for the murder of Lord Moyne) were brought to Israel in 1975 and received a state funeral with full military honors. They are considered to be national heroes until this day. (No apologies required and demanded by our presstitutes in this case …!)

Why did Churchill support the creation of a „Jewish homeland“ in Palestine? Perhaps this paragraph (written by him and published in 1920) can offer a clue:

 „Of course, Palestine is far too small to accomodate more than a fraction of the Jewish race, nor do the majority of national Jews want to go there (!). But if such a state should come into existence in our lifetime .. an event would have been created … which would … be especially in harmony with the truest interest of the British empire.“

Well, as it turned out, the immorality and cunning of the British Empire was more than matched by the Zionists …

Lord MoyneWinston Churchill was a close friend of Lord Moyne  but at the same time a supporter of the Zionist ambitions in Palestine. So how did the react to the cold-blooded murder in Cairo?

 If our dreams for Zionism are to end in the smoke of the assassin’s pistol and our labors for the future are to produce a new set of gangsters worthy of Nazi Germany, then many like myself would have to reconsider the position we have maintained so consistently and so long in the past. If there is to be any hope of a peaceful and successful future for Zionism, these wicked activities must cease, and those responsible for them must be destroyed root and branch”.

(Quote from an article by Winston Churchill, New York Times, November 18, 1944)

So we must keep all that in mind every time the Israeli government says it cannot negotiate with Hamas or Hezbollah „because they are terrorists“.  (Possible links between „IS“ and Israel need to be further examined ….)

against our better judgement WeirThe web of political intrigue spun by the Zionist organisations entangled more and more US-politicians (being no less dangerous than terror attacks in Palestine)  but they were not visible to the public.  A good primer for understanding the political machinations of Zionists in the US is this book:

Watch the author, the courageous Alison Weir talking about the book in this video:

Today the secrecy is no longer necessary as American current and future „leaders“ have accepted that they must kneel down before AIPAC/  Israel in order to advance their political career. (Just look at Hilary Clinton and try not to throw up …)

DARK FORCES & BLACK HOLES: EINSTEIN EXPOSES THE ZIONIST CRIMES

Albert EinsteinHere is one more contemporary (this time Jewish) 1940s-witness, appalled at the brutality of the Zionist terrorist-gangs whose job was to ethnically cleanse the newly created „Israel“ from the unwanted native Arab population. In their own self-serving language this terror was called  „encourage them to leave“. (Remember this happened only 3 years after the „Holocaust“ had ended and was meticulously planned  by the „chosen people“ …)

Albert Einstein’s (originally a supporter of the Zionist project) famous letter to the New York Times  (published on December 4, 1948 with the support of other prominent Jews) is still highly relevant, especially the exposé of the fascist nature of the Zionist military doctrine and the deception the Likud party practised to hide its true character (represented by Begin then and by Netanyahu now). Here are some excerpts:

TO THE EDITORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES:

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Ha Herut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.  It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit.  It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin’s political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.

[…] The public avowels of Mr. Begin’s party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state.  It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.

The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of theFreedom Party“

A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin.  This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base.  On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants—240 men, women, and children—and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem.  Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan.  But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin.

[A more detailed description of the Zionist crimes and schemes in Palestine during the 1930s and 40s can be found in Ilan Pappe’s excellent historical analysis: THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINE].

Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of  ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority.  [this could also serve a description of the NSDAP in the 1930s…]

Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions.  In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model.

[ZIONISTS ALSO USE TERROR-METHODS AGAINST NON-COMPLIANT JEWS]

During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community.  Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them.  By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.  

[…]

It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed about Mr.Begins political record, could lend their names and support to the movements he represents. Before irreparable damage [..] is done,… and the creation of the impression in Palestine that a large segment of America support fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objective of Mr. Begin and his government.

The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party.  This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a “Leader State” is the goal. “

(Einstein was supposed to become the second president of Israel but said No, thanks ….)

CONFESSIONS IN A DIARY

The first foreign minister of Israel, Moshe Sharett was often shaken by the ruthlessness of the military establishment and worried about the moral deterioration in Israeli society in the 1950s. Here are just a few observations from his diary:

“… the long chain of false incidents and hostilities we have invented, and so many clashes we have provoked ….

“… the narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness of our military leaders” [who] “seem to presume that the State of Israel may-or even must-behave in the realm of international relations according to the laws of the jungle.”

Source:Israel’s Sacred Terrorism

The picture that emerges, is of an Israel wantonly inflicting every possible measure of death and anguish on civilian populations in a mood reminiscent of regimes which neither Mr. Begin nor I would dare to mention by name.”

Source: Israel’s UN Ambassador and Foreign Minister Abba Eban in 1981, cited in Edward Herman, The Real Terror Network, 1982), p. 77.

FASCIST ROOTS DO NOT GO AWAY

Avi Shlaim 2009In January 2009 (when Gaza was suffering under „Operation“ Cast Lead)  the Guardian published an important article by Professor Avi Shlaim which is still worth reading because it exposes the lies, falsification of history and moral hypocrisy of the Israeli government. Here are some very revealing passages:

(Shlaim also uses the “gangster state” quote mentioned above and states that he no longer considers it a „too harsh“ judgement on Israel)

[…] „Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet Israel has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy on the Arab side and has done a great deal to undermine it. Israel has a long history of secret collaboration with reactionary Arab regimes to suppress Palestinian nationalism. Despite all the handicaps, the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon. In January 2006, free and fair elections for the Legislative Council of the Palestinian Authority brought to power a Hamas-led government. Israel, however, refused to recognise the democratically elected government, claiming that Hamas is purely and simply a terrorist organisation.“

[…] „The brutality of Israel’s soldiers is fully matched by the mendacity of its spokesmen. Eight months before launching the current war on Gaza, Israel established a National Information Directorate. The core messages of this directorate to the media are that Hamas broke the ceasefire agreements; that Israel’s objective is the defence of its population; and that Israel’s forces are taking the utmost care not to hurt innocent civilians. Israel’s spin doctors have been remarkably successful in getting this message across. But, in essence, their propaganda is a pack of lies.“

How is it possible that the whole history of a state and its dangerous core ideology  become “a pack of lies” that persists for decades?

(Our journalists know the answer …)

THE  SHADY ROLE OF BRITAIN

Considering that it was the British government  that had issued the “Balfour Declaration” in the first place which enabled the Zionists to claim Palestine as their phony “homeland”, that deranged British military officers (like Orde Wingate) trained the Zionist fighters in what can only be considered terrorist methods against civilians, and that it was Britain that betrayed both the Arabs and the Jews (with false promises), the one-sided accusation against the US (“creating a gangster state in Israel” – though not unfounded) can only be regarded as the result of “selective historical amnesia”.

So when PM David Cameron today puts on a show of moral indignation about the “anti-semitism” of the Labour Party he obviously suffers from the same mental affliction:  ignoring Britain’s (Dr. Frankenstein) role in creating the Zionist monster …

 

Coming Soon – Part 2:   WHAT IS WRONG WITH ZIONISM?

“I will never forgive the Arabs for FORCING US to kill them.  (Golda Meir)

 To understand the endless controversy of Israel it is inevitable to examine what Zionism really is (from a psychological perspective) and how the label “Anti-Semitism” is being used to stigmatize and ostracize critics of the Israeli state to avoid any real public debate about the moral bankruptcy of its leaders …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Uncategorized

Ukraine: Nightingale and Mockingbird

Nazis Made in USAI have written 150 articles on my German blog and did not have the time to write much on this site thinking that there are already a billion English bloggers  so who is going to read one more?

But the events in Ukraine are so important to the course of history (they might lead to WW III) and our understanding of Eurasian geopolitics that I have decided to post this article. Especially the Neo-Nazi massacre in Odessa which the German media has  ignored is a good reason to share my thoughts and the information I have gathered in the last months also with an English speaking audience.

The following essay was originally not written as a blog-post but as a series of replies to articles by Robert Parry (on Ukraine) who is an excellent journalist of the highest integrity. So debating some of his arguments or commenting on his perspective is a welcome change from the rubbish our mainstream “churnalists” turn out every day.

Yes, the government in Kiev is a fascist government and yes, there are Neo-Nazi storm / shock troops who have spread fear and terror since the Putsch “government” was installed in Kiev. So when Putin is referring to these facts it has nothing to do with “Russian propaganda to destablize Ukraine”.

US and British support for old and New Nazis goes back to the 1920s and many books have been written about that but I start here with 1945.  I was taught in school that “America” saved us from fascism but I know now that this was just another Big Lie .. Read on to understand why …

THE  ‘FIRE  VICTIMS’  STORY

The trade union building Odessa was not engulfed in flames as many media reports suggested

Robert, you write important articles about Ukraine but regarding the “fire victims” storyline you are misinformed. Most of the people in the labour union building in Odessa DID NOT DIE as a RESULT of the FIRE. The fire served only to DISTRACT ATTENTION from what was really going on inside: a Massacre in the style of a Nazi-Pogrom:

Isn’t it remarkable, that on the same day, May 2 in 1933 Hitler’s private armies, the SA and SS stormed labour union buildings all over Germany and deported the unionists to concentration camps? (some of them were tortured and killed). Given the knowledge I have gathered about the historical roots of the “ultra-nationalist” parties in Ukraine (codeword for Neo-Nazi) I find it extremely unlikely that the events in Odessa were happening on the same day in May just as a coincidence …

(WARNING: the following links contain graphic material of murder victims in Odessa)

Photos of the victims in Odessa show that the people were strangled with cables, shot in the head, or beaten to death. Their bodies were then dosed with an inflammable substance to hide the real cause of death. As some corpses clearly show because they are only partially burned (sometimes only the head and shoulders) while the rest of the body (including the clothes) are almost untouched.

You are also (unintentionally, I am sure) misleading the readers when you mention how under Reagan close ties were formed with Neo-Nazi groups in Latin America including the funding and training of “death-squads” against the rebellious poor. While this is certainly true, US-support for old and new Nazis goes back much further.

mykola-lebedIn 1945 tens of thousands of Nazi war criminals were brought to the US under the guise of the status as “displaced persons”. One of them, Mykola Lebed (see photo on the left) had been the head of the Ukrainian Gestapo “SB” (fused with a paramilitary group named UPA, which committed unspeakable atrocities against Poles in Volnya (100,000 victims) and also against the Jewish population.

The immigration authorities tried to block this because Lebed had been sentenced for planning the murder of the Polish Interior Minister in 1934 but the CIA and the DOJ intervened several times to ensure that this Nazi war-criminal (CIC files describe him as “known sadist and Nazi-collaborator) could not only enter the US but became a US citizen in no time.

Dulles letter LebedAllen Dulles personally wrote a letter to the DOJ to stress how important this man was for the CIA and that it must be guaranteed that his movements in and out of the US would not attract media spotlight to avoid drawing attention on the “operations” he was involved in.

When blood is up to the knee then the Ukraine will be free

(battle-chant of the “Banderas”, UPA members)

The US government not only protected these war criminals and Nazis for decades against prosecution but also supported a propaganda network to whitewash their crimes during the war. In return these people were (not only) employed to demonize the role of the Soviet Union (during and after the war) which – in reality – had saved Europe and the Ukraine from the evil reign of the Nazis (with 27 million “Russians” left dead).

The CIA used these criminals to “keep the flame of nationalism alive” (in the Baltics and especially in Ukraine).

Americas_Nazi_SecretSee also the book America’s Nazi Secret by John Loftus (fmr. “renegade” attorney for the DOJ; interviews with Loftus are also available on YouTube)

and Russ Bellant for the entanglement of the Republican Party with the old and new Nazis from the Baltic States and Ukraine.

It is now clear to me that the evil seed of Nazism, sown by the Anglo-American power elites after WWI (to set Germany and Russia against each other as in divide et impera) and never weeded out after WWII but instead “used” for Cold War purposes has now come into full bloom again … the UPA in Ukraine is back … another “indigenous monster” created by the puppet masters for their own geo-political games (like “Gladio” in Europe or Al Qaeda in the Caucasus, the ME and now Africa…)

God help us against these crazy, self-righteous bastards who run the “foreign policy” of the only “superpower” on this planet, and my sincerest apologies to the Russians for the treatment their president gets in our (German and English speaking) despicable media.

(Pt. II reply to an earlier article about what “Obama can do to save Ukraine” with some new material added)

THE  BRILLIANT ACT OF HYPNOSIS

“It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

Source: Harold Pinter Nobel Prize Lecture “Art, Truth and Politics” , 2005 (second half of the text beginning with “Political language …)

feeling us values(Pinter’s analysis is in my opinion the masterkey to understanding how  the US is controlling the fawning media in Europe and the US who are admiring the Naked Emperor while ignoring his crimes …)

Back to Ukraine and Robert Parry:

These people [the foreign policy establishment] are not able to “recognize the complex reality of Ukraine” because they live in a fantasy world where their support for a gargantuan, aggressive military-industrial-intelligence-machine of endless war and destruction needs to be justified by the existence of a “Manichean devil”. These devils have been created with massive financial assistance from Wall Street (which includes London bankers) since 1900 first with the Bolsheviks, then Hitler and the NSDAP as the most prominent examples.

After 1945 the Bolsheviks morphed in no time from former allies into the “Evil Empire” of the Soviet Union which served for 45 years as the psychological projection screen for capitalism’s own systemic crimes against humanity.

So all the massacres, subversions, overthrows of elected governments, economic, psychological, political and “kinetic” warfare – in other words the enormous suffering brought on millions of people – could be justified as “necessary defense against a threat to our liberty”.

(On the self-indoctrination of  the “national security managers” during the Cold War see the brilliant book IDEAL  ILLUSIONS by James Peck)

With the demise of the SU the “devil” had apparently disappeared so on “9/11” they created a new one:Terrorism”.

It had to be “Islamic” terrorism to have a pretext for invading, plundering and destroying the few countries with energy resources in the Middle East, which still cling to the absurd notion that they have a right of self-determination in economic and political affairs AND have the audacity to expose Israel as a Rogue State with WMDs.

THE  BATTLE  FOR  EURASIA

Ring_Around_Russia-smNow as the (ZB™) foreign policy “pivot” has shifted towards Asia, “Eurasia” has (once again) become the focal point for “intervention” of all sorts. Russia has been surrounded with NATO bases and Orwellian “missile shields”. Most governments of the Baltic States and the former SU in Eastern Europe are now US “clients”. Russia was looted by Western companies and Eastern oligarchs when the corrupt drunkard Yeltsin was in power. When he brought out the tanks against his own parliament (which tried to stop the looting) the West said nothing and Wall Street applauded.

The corrupt but democratically elected Yanukovich tried to establish Ukraine as a neutral (non-aligned) power between Russia and US / NATOstan (formerly known as Europe) and realizing, that a “co-operation treaty” with the EU would ruin the (already weak) country, he opted for economic cooperation with Russia.

Then the CIA-controlled (Gladio style) Neo-Nazi hordes were let loose on the “Maidan” (in addition to the – carefully prepared and executed – ongoing civil society subversion with NGOs operating under the guise of “democracy promotion” à la Gene Sharp / the Albert Einstein Institute (front) and others) to get rid of Yanukovich. This was presented to the world as a “democratic revolution”.

oleh-tyahnybok-1

Oleh Tyanybok leader of the “Svoboda” party (original name: Social nationalist party of Ukraine

The new, handpicked Brown-Shirt government (which includes Neo-liberals and Neo-Nazis, two sides of the same coin) – with a neoliberal banker as president – has difficulties to hide the fanatic, racist “nationalism” of its foot-soldiers and ideologues who want an “ethnically-pure” Ukraine and were brainwashed to hate everything “Russian”.

Like the Pavlovian dogs, they salivate every time they hear (or say) the derogatory term for Russians: “Moskal’s” and direct their irrational hatred on the imagined Triplet-enemy: Russian-Jew-Communist (this is exactly what Hitler also did to incite ethnic hatred for political purposes)

MORAL ILLUSIONS

Robert, have you realized that these crazies who are in charge of “foreign policy” HAVE TO “exclude the nasty reality of what has actually occurred (not just] in Ukraine” in order to keep up the fantasy that they are the good guys representing a “good” country which stands for democracy and freedom …? You really cannot discuss the motives of US “foreign policy” without the help of a psychiatrist ….

So of course neither Obama nor anyone else of these psychopaths would ever “admit” (neither to themselves nor to the public) what they are actually doing: committing unspeakable crimes and violating every rule of human decency that was ever invented.

warispeaceThey don’t want to “bring this crisis under control” …they CREATED it … they need wars and conflicts of all sorts because it gives them the feeling of power and the “Neo-Con” (more “con” than “neo”) disciples of Leo Strauss and Nietzsche regard WAR as the ultimate – and even noble – expression of political power, of the “right of the superior” to subjugate and destroy “the inferior”.

(And please do not use the word “conspiracy theory” when you mean “pretext” … it is a stigma-word to immunize oneself against valid arguments by denigrating the persons who use these arguments … and is really aimed at the audience  … but in this case there are no “valid” arguments as you perfectly know …)

Putin has to become the new “devil” since he is the only one available and strong enough for this role in the Great Game” of getting Eurasia (energy-wise) under control AND because he has started to subvert the dollar-hegemony (huge gas /trade deals with China to be paid in their own respective currencies) … AND there is a project of the BRICS countries to create their own “development bank” in order to evade the tyranny of the US-led IMF banking cartel.

CHARACTER ASSASSINATION or Attack is the Best Defense

Of course, students of the (real history) of American foreign policy know that US elites have no credibility whatsoever and their moral posture lecturing other leaders about democracy and freedom is utterly ridiculous and hypocritical. But you can seemingly elevate you own moral status by denigrating your opponent with a massive “strategic information” campaign in order to demonize this person in the eyes  of the public.

Putin smilingSo they are going to destroy Putin’s credibility so that no matter what he says or what he does, the audience must be conditioned to shudder at the mere mention of his name, or when they hear the adjective “pro-Russian” framed in the context of aggression and violence (parotted in the news in Germany 24/7) .

Your are right, Putin wants to be respected as a statesman and he wants even more respect for Russia which he brought back from the brink of ruin to a major player in world affairs – but no empire.

27 Million “Russians” died in WWII, the soldiers among them had defeated 90% of the German Wehrmacht divisions at the horrible Eastern Front while we were taught in history lessons that “America” has saved us from fascism. What a cruel joke.

Hitlers ShadowIt was “America” (as the new version of the British Empire) that protected the worst Nazi criminals from prosecution and used them to build their “Intelligence” agencies and new networks of subversion and terror in Latin America and in Europe. (The “American people” had of course no say in the matter …)

So Putin is right, when “he has come to view the U.S. government and the EU as sources of endless double standards and double talk, places without honour” – that’s what they are … predatory finance and capitalism have no “honour” .. it does not pay …

You mentioned JFK’s American university address: (with this speech his signed his death warrant) There is one simple sentence in it which I find extremely important:

“I also believe that we must re-examine our own attitude – as individuals and as a Nation- for our attitude is as essential as theirs.”

Self-reflection is a normal and necessary thing for grown-up, intelligent people but can anyone imagine a member of the US power establishment saying these words today in public? No way.

Robert, in your article you are finally wondering “whether Obama can pick up Kennedy’s torch of peaceful understanding” and see the world through the eyes of the other side, etc.

These people live in another moral universe than the rest of us … in it there is no place “for peaceful understanding” only dominance for the “chosen” ones and subservience for the others.

The US Empire is built on massive self-deception and a moralizing, crusading ethos to legitimate the crimes of aggression against the rest of the world.

As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet, self-honesty is the basis for moral actions toward others … “and as the day follows the night, thou canst not then be false to any other man” (if I remember the words correctly).

“Talks” about one or the other crisis are meaningless when the only superpower is utterly dishonest … I really feel sorry for Sergei Lavrov who has to sit at the “negotiating table” with these double-dealing hypocrites …

William Blum puts it in a nutshell:

(Dear children), US foreign policy does not mean well …  But when will the “churnalists” get that?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Scahill & Greenwald: The Wrong Target (& the wrong context)

 

che statliberty with gunSo there we have it: Jeremy Scahill and Glen Greenwald, regarded by many people as two of the best (and last) investigative journalists of the US, have delivered their first jointly written article:

What a big disappointment for all people who are still able to think for themselves. Why? Read on to understand why this ostensible “revealing” of a “secret role” of the NSA is a red herring …

1 WHAT IS THE TOPIC OF THE ARTICLE?

The gist of it is that the authors are pointing out the “unreliability of the NSA’s targeting methods” because it results in the killing of “innocent people” abroad. N.B.: This is presented in the context of the GWOT (“Global War on Terror”), the tireless “counterterrorism” activities of US-government agencies which (conveniently) escalated after 9/11.

This exciting game of “geo-locating” suspected evil-doers in foreign lands (or rather their SIM-card) with modern surveillance and wireless technology, blown up to STASI meets GESTAPO-like proportions by the NSA, enables the “the CIA and U.S. military to conduct night raids and drone strikes to kill or capture the individual in possession of the device.”

The criticism rests on the fact that mostly signal intelligence (SIGINT) is used as the basis for these military “missions”. The victims violent death (whose identity was never verified by people on the ground) is caused by “unreliable metadata”, observed “activities on a SIM-card”, in other words IT-systems, algorithms, computer programs, etc. so in the end electronic devices determine how and if a “target” is selected (or so it seems).

An algorithm is a step-by-step list of directions that need to be followed to solve a problem. The instructions should be simple enough such that each step can be done without thinking about it. […]

(That sounds about right for the “intelligence” community …and by the way How can you solve complex political problems with mathematical formulae?)

Unlawful Death by Algorithmic Logic?

Deputy chief minister of Pakistan's NortThe NSA did not care to comment on the effectiveness of the “we track ‘em you whack ‘em” co-operation between the NSA, the CIA and the “special forces” of the US military. Only a spokesperson for the NSC told the authors that they do rely on human intelligence (HUMINT in spook parlance) after people have been murdered if there is reason to believe that civilians are among the casualties. That’s something, isn’t it?

The undisclosed source for this article is a former JSOC drone operator who “remains highly disturbed” about the targeting tactics used to locate the cell phones of “terror suspects” because (as the article explains in more detail) they are “fundamentally flawed”.

At the same time we learn that this guy “is adamant that the technology has been responsible for taking out terrorists and networks of people facilitating improvised explosive device attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan  […].”  The obvious “doublethink” of this guy apparently does not bother the authors.

The anonymous former drone operator, who killed strangers in foreign lands with hellfire missiles, cluster bombs and other ghastly weapons, is also quoted with this telling remark:

“It’s of course assumed that the phone belongs to a human being who is nefarious and considered an ‘unlawful enemy combatant. This is where it gets very shady.”

(The importance of this remark and the context in which it is presented will be analysed below).

The article goes on to say that the Taliban “are increasingly aware of these tactics and have begun to confuse their trackers: “… they have purposely and randomly distributed SIM cards among their units in order to elude their trackers.”

I am not going into any more “details” of the article here because in my opinion it is a journalistic charade (or “psy-op”, if you will) and distracts from the real BIG ISSUE behind the drone program and all other surveillance, tracking and “lethal operations” (read: murder)” activities of the US in foreign countries:

2 GLOBAL MURDER INC.: THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

The war on terrorism is a bunch of crap.”

Brendan Bryant, former drone-sensor operator on German TV, Nov 28, 2013.

brandon-bryant

Scahill and Greenwald tell us that the story is corroborated by Brendan Bryant, another after-the-fact kind of military “whistle-blower” who left the US Air Force in 2011. The article also says that Bryant “is committed to informing the public about lethal flaws in the U.S. drone program”. This is a misleading understatement:

Bryant appeared in a political Talk-Show on German public TV (ARD) at the end of November last year. The topic of the discussion was “The Secret War”- examining the role of the German government in facilitating illegal US military operations abroad. (“AFRICOM” is headquartered in Ramstein, Germany –drone strikes in Somalia were directed from there, a violation of German and international law).

NO-ONE DESERVES TO DIE”

Bryant said at the beginning: “I was supposed to protect people” (he originally worked as a video-analyst) but as a drone-sensor operator he realized it was all about “killing people and destroying things”. When the talk-show host, Beckmann asked him what he saw on his screen, he answered: “You see people dying … how can you just sit and watch death and destruction?”

He realized that the individual – a human being in a foreign country – is being reduced to a “target” (a thing … stripped of his humanity) and added: “…(but) you see how they interact with their kids, play soccer, etc. …  there is not the intimacy of a battle on the ground but [in contrast to bomber pilots] still you see the consequence of your actions (people dying, their body ripped apart by ghastly weapons…)… … it’s not an “aseptic killing” (just pushing a button to hit a “target”) … there should be no way to accept it (the self-deluding, exculpatory ideology behind the drone strikes). His most important statement regarding the “target” was probably this:

“He has a life just like you … they want us to think that if they say he is an extremist, he deserves to die. With this mind-set they could say the same about you one day … No-one deserves to die.”

Then he added that the cold-blooded murder of the American Muslim cleric Awlaki and his teenage-son Abdulrahman in Yemen (also mentioned in the article and often told by Jeremy Scahill before)

Abdulrahman

gave him the final creeps as he realized that these “missions” were criminal acts, severe violations of the US constitution: “..the pursuit of liberty and justice for all” cannot be reconciled with the concept of “extrajudicial or targeted killings”. Call it what you like, the fact remains the same:

All these “operations” in foreign countries are grave breaches of international law (the hard-earned principle of the inviolability of state sovereignty), the Human Rights Charta of the UN and of course the legal principle of due process, habeas corpus, etc. which protect individuals from the abuse of state-power. Bryant stressed that everybody has a right to “a fair and speedy trial” – in other words the government must prove their alleged guilt in a courtroom beyond a reasonable doubt and the whole concept of killing a “terror-suspect” because he might be planning to do something against the wishes of the US-hegemon is ludicrous and mad.

But of course we all know that the synthetic terror of 9/11, 7/7, the Madrid bombings, etc. were the big “game changer” in the legal dimension. Like the Nazis did in the 1930s, “emergency laws” were passed quickly and the fear induced by the new version of the “Manichean devil” (Bin Laden / Al Qaeda®) was used to drive the “bewildered herd” but also many so called “intellectuals” into mental submission by simply using the immunizing stigma-word  “conspiracy theory”:

The first and simplest stage of discipline, which can be taught even to young children,is called in Newspeak,Crimestop. Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought.[…]

Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.

George Orwell, 1984

When I read the comments on the article, many people thanked Scahill and Greenwald for their “excellent job”, etc. But I don’t think they deserve any gratefulness from us because by narrowing the debate to a technical level (flawed and unreliable methods) they do us a great disservice.

Violence has become the nation’s leading industry…How could we even discuss these issues, if we cannot face up to this arrogant sense of our own superiority, this assumption that it is our God-given role to be the dominant power of the world?”

Senator J. William Fulbright: The Arrogance of Power (1967)

Stressing the point that “the wrong people” get killed by the NSA / CIA / JSOC joint murder operations helps to distract attention from the real concerns of paramount importance:

THE US HAS NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER TO TRACK, OBSERVE, LET ALONE HARM OR KILL ANYBODY IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY.

THE WHOLE “WAR ON TERROR” IS A MONUMENTAL SCAM based on the BIG LIE: 9/11.

The article is written in the spirit and context of “counter-terrorism” in other words it does not even once question / criticize

  • the validity of the underlying premise of the “War on Terror”: that the US is protecting its citizens from harm by killing “suspected” terrorists
  • the illegality of the drone operations and all other (more or less covert) activities of US agencies in foreign countries
  • the cowardice, criminality and bestiality of murdering people with drones (often executing a second strike when family members or other bystanders are trying to aid the first victim …)
  • the utter contempt of the US government for the fundamental legal principles of a civilized society
  • the real guiding principles of American foreign policy and its gargantuan “national security” apparatus
  • that the whole “counter-terrorism” (to protect lives) context is a charade designed to cloak its real purpose: serving as a pretext to undermine the legal restraints achieved after two world wars and re-instate the jus ad bellum although officially the US is not at war (with Pakistan, Yemen, etc.)
  • the fundamental structures of American power

The article’s obvious concern with an “unreliable tactic that results in the deaths of innocent or unidentified people” seems noble but is missing the point:

“They might have been terrorists,” he says. “Or they could have been family members who have nothing to do with the target’s activities.” We’re not going after people – we’re going after their phones, in the hopes that the person on the other end of that missile is the bad guy.”

Even if the person (carrying the targeted phone or SIM card) is “a bad guy” and the decision to “geo-locate” this individual is based on “information from a variety of sources and methods before we draw conclusions”, even if Obama did “kill terrorists with the utmost precision” the US HAS

  • NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER TO TERRORIZE THESE PEOPLE IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES WITH ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE, NIGHTLY RAIDS, LET ALONE  DRONE ATTACKS.
  • NO RIGHT TO INTERFERE IN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF ANY NATION, NO MATTER HOW NOBLE THE PRETEXT

At first sight the article seems to be critical of the drone strikes but there are some revealing sentences which call into question the real purpose of its publication:

“The government does not appear to apply the same standard of care in selecting whom to target for assassination.”

The former JSOC drone operator goes on to say that almost 90% of the drone attacks was “triggered by SIGINT,’ which means it was triggered by a geo-location cell [a special unit within the NSA]. Scahill and Greenwald then lament the fact that the WaPo published an article heralding “the NSA’s claims about its effectiveness at locating terror suspects (and relying only on government sources).

drone wars

Any journalist who cares for democratic principles and the rule of law (among civilized peoples) must be aware of the implicit meaning of this sentence: instead of worrying about the inadequate standards used to select “targets for assassination” the outrage ought to be directed against the real and huge problem –

The notion that a “superpower” can terrorize and kill anybody anywhere as long as the media narrative provides some moral fig-leaf for the illegal and inhumane “missions”.

The information that the CIA “utilizes a pod on aircraft that vacuums up massive amounts of data from any wireless routers, computers, smart phones or other electronic devices that are within range” might raise alarm bells in the minds of the readers but this disturbing emotion is quickly “balanced” with the mentioning of the big black bogeyman, Al Qaeda (AQ): if communication devices are “believed to be used by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula then of course we surely understand the need to “vacuum up massive amounts of data” …and call this Orwellian operation “VICTORYDANCE”, semantically celebrating the great achievement of the joint NSA/CIA effort to “map the Wi-Fi fingerprint of nearly every major town in Yemen.” (Soon coming to a major town here?)

Another revealing sentence is this one:

 “JSOC acknowledges that it would be completely helpless without the NSA conducting mass surveillance on an industrial level,” the former drone operator says. “That is what creates those baseball cards you hear about,” featuring potential targets for drone strikes or raids.

I find the use of the word “helpless” in this context very odd: JSOC is a “special forces” team, meaning tough guys prepared to commit all sorts of crimes in foreign countries only because they have been told how “elite” and secret their unit is and that they are carrying out noble missions for the greatest country on earth (the same indoctrination was used by the Nazis for the Waffen-SS). Why put such a statement into the article?

To “balance” the impact of the critique concerning the “flawed methods” of the NSA? This could even be seen as an attempt to legitimize the mass surveillance of the NSA …

who are the real terroristsWhy do Scahill / Greenwald mention

  • that the village in Al-Majala province where women and 22 children were massacred with Tomahawk missiles (releasing hundreds of cluster bomblets which “each explode into over 200 sharp steel fragments that can cause injuries 150m away” – see also his excellent video-documentary “Dirty Wars”) was “an alleged AQ camp”  – to make the brutality and illegality of the attack appear more “reasonable”?
  • that it is “not clear whether the strike was based on metadata collection?
  • What difference does it make to the victims and their relatives if these people were murdered based on HUMINT or SIGINT or a combination of both?  Again, the brutality and illegality of these crimes against humanity (and the unbearable arrogance and self-delusion behind it) must be the focus of the journalistic work not the “flawed tactics” of an insane surveillance system
  • this statement of the former JSOC drone operator:  ‘This isn’t a science. This is an art.’ It’s kind of a way of saying that it’s not perfect.”

Wow. So terrorizing people (whose identity you don’t even know) in faraway countries with a totalitarian surveillance system and “stand-by” killer-drones (with no accountability whatsoever for the perpetrators) is considered “an art” by these people.

reaper Pakistan

The authors make us realize that the application of these new technologies, mean a “deviation from standard operating methods of war” and “represent the dawn of a new era” (comparing their impact to the first atomic bombs dropped in Japan) the military apparently salivating at the thought of how immensely powerful they become with weapons like these) but again they frame the issue (downplay it) by ignoring the legal (illegal) and immoral dimension of the whole “mission” and by using the same misleading military jargon as the perpetrators of these crimes …

KEEP FEEDING THE BEAST

mlk beyoond vietnam--spiritual death

Martin Luther King said in his best speech (“Beyond Vietnam” – for which he was killed exactly one year later):

“My government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.”

This was true in the 1960s but it is also true today (even more so). Perhaps Scahill and Greenwald should concern themselves with the “bigger picture” before writing about drone wars and the flaws of surveillance systems but the only journalists capable of understanding the real (moral) dimension of what is going on seems to be the wonderful Chris Hedges …

That the whole charade of “national security” is (and always has been) a billion dollar game of deception and intrigue so that the military-intelligence-finance-organized crime-complex gets more power and more influence to conduct their psychological, ideological and “kinetic” wars. A good start would be the books and interviews of Colonel Fletcher Prouty who witnessed the establishment of the CIA as a shadowy network reaching into all civilian and military power structures of the United States and over time became a global covert force (see also the GLADIO operations in Europe). CIA, NSA, JSOC, NSC, whatever their names and acronyms are, taken together they constitute a state within a state and if Obama thinks he is the “commander in chief” he should think twice …

Another extremely important book to see through the maze of deception called “national security” is Ideal Illusions by James Peck. Peck combed through the national archives very thoroughly and exposed how the national security managers deluded themselves (and others) by projecting their own criminal intentions and ideological self-indoctrination on the “enemy” (then “communism” with the embodiment of evil, the Soviet Union). The book is also a treasure-trove for political quotations – here is just a small selection – still relevant today (just replace communism with “terrrorim”, the indoctrination and hypocrisy are the same …)

“More can be won by illusion than by coercion”. Harold Laswell

Isn’t it true that we very often tend to accuse someone with whom we are a rival of the very thing that we have in mind ourselves?”

Senator Fulbright, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations: Hearings on psychological aspects on foreign policy, June 1969

 

Just because Goebbels and the Kremlin debased it, that is no reason why we cannot elevate it …”

C.D.Jackson, 1947  expert of psychological “operations” under Eisenhower

 

Americans are funny kids … they are always sticking their noses into somebody’s business which isn’t any of theirs. We send missionaries and political propagandists to China, Turkey, India, and everywhere to tell people how to live … Russia won’t let them in. But when Russia puts out propaganda to help our parlour pinks – well, that’s bad – so we think. There is not any difference between the two approaches except one is ‘my approach’ and the other is ‘yours’. Just a ‘moat and beam’ affair.”

The Private Papers of Harry S. Truman (1980)

 

 “You all start with the promise that democracy is some good. I don’t think it is worth a damn .. people say, ‘if Congress were more representative of the people it would be better’. I say the Congress is too damn representative. It’s just as stupid as the people are, just as uneducated, just as dumb, just as selfish.”

Dean Acheson (oral interview, Truman Presidential Library) p.24

 “No – but two wrongs never make a right. You Americans are shocked when we are neutral between the two of you. We are not neutral as between freedom and slavery, democracy and dictatorship, but we are neutral as between great power rivalry.

We don’t see the Russian fleet in Oriental waters. We see only the American fleet. We don’t see the Russian Army in mainland China but we see a good deal of the US army in Formosa, Japan, Korea, and Okinawa and the Philippines.”

(Report on the image of the US in other countries (George Allen, Director of the US Information Agency in India asking if thepeople did condone the totalitarian internal policies of the soviets the answer was –)

In my opinion the key and eye-opening insight of the book is (in a nutshell) this:

– highly relevant today also in the context of the “war on terror” and the “promotion of democracy” charade (the latest victim being Ukraine)-

“The cold war then was never about protecting- or even accepting – the sovereignty of other nations … but rather about finding ever more effective ways to break down barriers to American influence. It was always about penetrating other nations, which is why weaker nations were insisting upon the principle of non-intervention in other countries internal affairs and have been ever since. ..”

but

THE NAKED EMPEROR IS STILL ADMIRED FOR HIS WONDERFUL CLOTHES (see Geneva and Sochi “reporting”) … the media is just an assembly line for “pasteurized” news … the  reality is unspeakable:

The United States is a rogue state .. it has committed more crimes (“peacetime operations” in CIA parlance) than any other country on this planet … it is the ultimate terrorist … and yet manages to pose as a moral authority … (see Harold Pinter’s Nobel speech in 2005) and  keeps lecturing others on democracy and freedom …

Full spectrum dominance indeed … (the ultimate power is thought control …)

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Persians, Pharisees and Phony US “Anti-Proliferation

This is a reply to Iran Slams US as ‘World’s Only Atomic Criminal’

ISRAEL: A SAFE HAVEN FOR JEWS? FORGET IT


“Israel never confirms or denies claims that it has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The country positions itself outside international treaties, which would make it subject to inspection. They say the costs of such secrecy to Israeli democracy are too great. Uzi Even, was a young scientist working, in the 60s, at Dimona – Israel’s nuclear reactor….Today, Mr Even says it should be shut down.

Forty-year-old reactors tend to have accidents and he believes that Dimona, which is beyond the reach of the Israeli parliament, needs to be brought into a system of accountability and public scrutiny. Mr Even explained: “You should have an outside watchdog. “The secrecy more or less created an extra- territorial area in Israel where standard procedures of safety monitoring are not implemented. “So worker safety, environmental questions and industrial safety procedures, are not covered, and there are thousands of people working there.”

ENFORCED SILENCE


Nothing illustrates this better than the sensitive issue of Dimona’s cancer victims. In an Israeli documentary in 2002, Dimona workers said accidents had been routine. They spoke of explosions, fires and liquid and toxic gas leaks that they had to clean, often without protection.

The authorities denied they had worked with radioactive materials. They have refused to compensate them or their families for their years of loyal service. Because of the strict secrecy rules they were even unable to fight for their rights. When Correspondent approached one of the workers, who was dying of cancer, he refused to be interviewed – but with some regret.

Unaware he was being filmed, he said: “I wanted to talk to you but I have been silenced.

“They came from intelligence and told me not to talk. “They said I would be like Vanunu.” Vanunu has another year in jail. When his sentence is finished he hopes to emigrate to America. But Mr Horev has clearly let it be known he never intends to let Vanunu leave Israel.”

Source: BBC

Watch the shocking and still relevant documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=178254070504611595#

.. the Israel people were exposed only to the Israeli media, the Israel media brainwash, the Israel media bias against me. Not they, they were not open to see all the story and all the danger of nuclear weapons in secret in such small state, Israel.

And also that these people was not exposed to the idea that these Israel people were sending a lot of propaganda, what they call holocaust industry, to know and to understand that nuclear weapons are the real holocaust and the Jewish people have no right and no justification to use the atomic bomb.”

Excerpt from an interview with Mordechai Vanunu by David Frost

From the BBC documentary:

“Despite claims that Dimona was for peaceful purposes only, Israel’s leader Ben Gurion was summoned to Washington.  President Kennedy feared an arms race in the Middle East and demanded inspections.But when inspectors finally entered the plant in May 1961 they were tricked. They were shown a fake control room on the ground floor. They were unaware of the six floors below where the plutonium was made.

Well this was something of great pride and almost a legendary story in Dimona, according to Vanunu.  When the Americans came they were completely hoodwinked. All the entrances including the lift shafts were bricked up and plastered over so it was impossible for anyone to find their way down to the lower floors.”

AFTER KENNEDY’S ASSASSINATION THE PRESSURE ON ISRAEL WAS OFF …


His successor Lyndon Johnson turned a blind eye. Then In 1969 Israel’s Golda Meir and President Richard Nixon struck a deal, renewed by every President to this day. Israel’s nuclear programme could continue as long as it was never made public. It’s called nuclear ambiguity.”

(The reporter interviews the former Israeli Prime Minister (now President) on the subject)

BBC: The term nuclear ambiguity, in some ways it sounds very grand.  But isn’t just a euphemism for deception?

PERES: If somebody wants to kill you, and you use a deception to save your life it is not immoral.  If we wouldn’t have enemies we wouldn’t need deceptions.  We wouldn’t need deterrent.

Remember this argument next time  Obama accuses Iran of  deception, although it has not violated any  (NPT) treaty obligations so far and the IAEA inspectors  have found no evidence for weapons-grade uranium enrichment let alone the production of plutonium …

BBC: Was this the justification for concealing the floors of the plutonium reprocessing areas from the Americans, the inspectors, when they came?

PERES: You are having a dialogue with yourself, not with me.

BBC: But that’s been documented in a number of books

PERES: Ask the question to yourself, not to me.I don’t have to answer your questions even.  I don’t see any reason why.”

Imagine, Ahmadinejad talking like that …  all hell would break loose…

As some arrogant asshole from a conservative think-tank said on the eve of the Iraq war to a peace activist who was accusing USrael of unbearable hypocrisy on the topic of WMD:

“It’s not the weapons, it’s WHO has them.

The same unacceptable and self-delusional “argument” was used by Benjamin Netanyahu recently, trying to justify Israel’s  immoral, hypocriticial and dangerous refusal to sign the NPT, to say nothing of the enforced media silence on the subject of demanding accountability for Israel’s nuclear arsenal,, while harping on about the manufactured “threat” from Iran.

We are the good  (morally and racially superior) guys, our diabolical weapons and even our cruelty are necessary for a “just” cause, so we are entitled to destroy and kill indiscriminately (Arabs, of course) – that line of argument goes back  directly to the Nuremberg trials …

Even US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates acknowledged, that Iran’s alleged “secret” attempts to acquire nuclear weapons are to be viewed in the context of deterrence, not military aggression, but he was quickly admonished for his candour and “brought back” in line with the official Zionist PR-story by Senator Graham …

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Do you believe the Iranians are trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability?

GATES: Yes, sir, I do.

GRAHAM: The president of Iran has publicly disavowed the existence of the Holocaust, he has publicly stated that he would like to wipe Israel off the map [NO, he has NOT!]. Do you think he’s kidding?

GATES: No, I don’t think he’s kidding. And—but I think that there are, in fact, higher powers in Iran than he, than the president. And I think that while they are certainly pressing, in my opinion, for a nuclear capability, I think that they would see it in the first instance as a deterrent. They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons—Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west, and us in the Persian Gulf—

GRAHAM: Do you believe the president of Iran is lying when he says he’s not?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Do you believe the Iranians would consider using that nuclear weapons capability against the nation of Israel?

GATES: I don’t know that they would do that, Senator. I think that the risks for them obviously are enormously high. I think that they see value—

GRAHAM: If I may?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Can you assure the Israelis that they will not attack Israel with a nuclear weapon, if they acquire one?

GATES: No, sir, I don’t think that anybody can provide that assurance.

How effective  propaganda (now called “strategic communication”) and global “churnalism” created the global “wiped-off-the-map” hoax, was also analyzed earlier by Jonathan Steele in The Guardian:

“Ask anyone in Washington, London or Tel Aviv if they can cite any phrase uttered by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the chances are high they will say he wants Israel “wiped off the map”.

Again it is four short words, though the distortion is worse than in the Khrushchev case. The remarks are not out of context. They are wrong, pure and simple. Ahmadinejad never said them. Farsi speakers have pointed out that he was mistranslated. The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran’s first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that “this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” just as the Shah’s regime in Iran had vanished.

He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The “page of time” phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon. There was no implication that either Khomeini, when he first made the statement, or Ahmadinejad, in repeating it, felt it was imminent, or that Iran would be involved in bringing it about.”

If you want to understand what “churnalism” is all about (the media acting as as a flock of sheep or an echo-chamber …) try this video:

Back to the BBC documentary:

“The programme listed more than a hundred Dimona workers
who’d developed cancer and whose claims were being ignored
. A doctor and two lawyers backed their story. It was the first time Dimona workers had spoken out.

BBC: “I want to talk to Ariel Spieler.  He’s suffering from cancer and in the last few years he’s seen a number of his friends and colleagues who worked there with him die of the disease. He’s been fighting for compensation for their families, for their widows, and I know he’d really like to talk to us about this. He’s told me he wishes he could, but he’s also told me he’s been warned off.  He’s been told not to talk.  I’m going to go and see him and see if he’ll change his mind.”

Spieler: “The Secret Service silenced me.They’ve silenced me completely. They told me not to say one word. What can I do?  What can I do? They told me: “You’ll end up like Vanunu”.How long has he been in prison? 15 years? Do you want me to go to jail?

BBC: “I really wanted to talk. I asked the others but they refused.Nobody wants to talk… the doctors, the relatives, the lawyers. Nobody is prepared to talk about it. I just don’t get it.

If this was Iraq or North Korea I’d understand why people are so scared to talk. But this is Israel.

This is supposed to be a democracy.”

(Perception is everything…)







Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

NucLIAR & Flat Earth News

Congratulations! Thanks to the publication of the latest NucLiar “strategic information” piece, the Guardian is now the front-runner for the “Flat Earth News Media Award”, (category: Daft Science & Environment Editor) founded by the Edward Bernays Society for contributions to “moulding public opinon” as part of a hidden economic agenda.

In the middle of the “climate change” dilemma, wouldn’t it be a great PR-idea to sponsor an Oxford professor (pay for the publication of his ludicrous book) who claims that “nuclear dangers are overstated” in order to  generate support for the “nuclear renaissance”?  Worried about the easily detectable, systemic distortions of an incompetent “expert” and  the dangerous “dumbing down” of science? No Fear!    “They report what they are given” [cited in  “Flat Earth News”]

Excuse the irony & candour, but this is so obviously a piece of propaganda for the nuclear industry that the editor who approved it, ought to be fired at the spot: either for lack of journalistic integrity or for sheer stupidity. Here are some basic reasons why the whole story is a  PR-scam:

1) Lack of Expertise:

Allison is a particle physicist, not an expert in molecular biology, biochemistry, biophysics  &  genetics  (the  combined, overlapping knowledge necessary for radiation biology). The focus of all big questions about the effects of low doses of ionizing radiation is the cellular, molecular level not the primitive concepts of  “body dose” or “organ dose” which are based on crude physical models developed by – you guessed it – physicists.

2) Comparing apples  to oranges

Allison, as echoed in the article, makes no distinctions between different types of radiation exposure but the effects of  acute,  external, low LET ionizing radiation (gamma-rays from nuclear explosions or x-rays) cannot be simply extrapolated to estimate the health risks from nuclear installations because they result from chronic, internal, high LET ionizing radiation, especially from inhaled or ingested alpha-particles.

Also, not all radioisotopes have the same biological impact if internalized:  e.g. whether from “ hot particles”, “warm particles”, Plutonium or Uranium, the effects are different. If particles are “stuck” in tissue or sequentially decaying radionuclides like Strontium 90 (from weapons fallout) bind to DNA, the radiological and chemical toxicity cannot just be lumped together under the heading of “same dose, same risk”. Auger emitters for example, widely used for radiotherapy, create much greater damage at the cellular level than other radionuklides, i.e. x-rays:

“Even in the case of uniform distribution, some of those Auger emitters are highly radiotoxic compared to hard gamma rays. For Auger emitters to bond to radiosensitive sites in cell nucleus, much higher radiation effectiveness could be expected.”

This is another reason why the simple comparison of risk between radiotherapy exposure, X-rays, CT-scans, Sellafield and “natural background” exposure is not valid since Allison’s arguments are based on the premise that ionizing energy  is  always evenly distributed in  the body, which is demonstrably false. (More on the subject see under 4 below)

3) Nucliar AtTAC aided by “ Truth-Avoiding Coverage

Instead of inflicting on the public yet another endless debate between disagreeing scientists,  it ought to be the job of journalists to investigate who is telling the truth[1] and who is lying or serving a hidden agenda. We need an independent press to establish trust and authenticity in order  to get real insight.

As Nick Davies rightly points out, the concept of “neutrality” or “balance” must be reassessed to stop “the packaging of conflicting claims which is precisely the opposite of truth-telling”. Jha and Bosley are a perfect example of this problem: The assertions of Allison  are “balanced” by reporting what other scientists have to say, but all statements are dubious and not illuminative as long as the bigger political context is missing and even more so,  if the “background” is also a showcase for “churnalism”: “Nuclear radiation risk: The current consensus” which brings us to

4) Who the hell is the ICRP? How is “dose” calculated and what does it mean?

How is the public supposed to make an informed judgement if journalists do not bother to get a deeper understanding of a controversial subject BEFORE they write about it (or publish relevant “material”)? The aforementioned “current consensus” background by Alok Jha is another showcase for ignorant “science reporting”:

“How is radiation harmful?” ( One size fits all – Oversimplifications)

Ionising radiation … can damage the DNA in the nucleus of a cell. Unless the cell’s repair machinery can fix the breaks, or else the cell itself is killed, it has a higher chance of becoming cancerous.”

If the “editor” had bothered to do even a quick research on the subject, he would have discovered, that this is  no longer a valid assessment of risk because hundreds of studies have challenged the outdated view, that relevant biological damage occurs only if the cell nucleus is hit:

To be sure, new mechanistic possibilities must now be considered in interpreting the results of both in vitro and in vivo studies inasmuch as nuclear DNA alone no longer can be viewed as the only relevant target for the actions of IR, or even necessarily the most important target for eliciting at least some detrimental effects of IR under some exposure conditions.”[2]

“What is a safe dose?”

This is an even greater insult to any intelligent reader (and to painstaking journalism) because Jha has obviously just copied the “industry friendly information” (lacking any scientific credibility) he received from Allison. Besides, the first thing he should have done is explain  what “dose” realls means, that it is not based on scientific measurement but just a theoretical, mathematical construct:  to give an  estimate based on a physical “ model”, multiplied with another factor to give “RBE”,  which is supposed to enable the quantification of risk (the likelihood and extent of biological damage). A great source of information for all these questions is the 2004 CERRIE Report (and the surrounding controversy of political influence) which the guardian reported – why did Jha not use  these sources instead of recycling the rubbish from Allison?

It is not so hard to understand  that, whether a tiny alpha-particle is stuck in lung tissue or in the lymph nodes, etc. makes a huge difference in determining the detrimental health effects, not only because different organs have a different radiation sensitivity.  Besides, it is plainly ridiculous to calculate / extrapolate linearly from the “equivalent” (organ) dose which is in turn derived from “effective” (body) dose when effects on microscopic (incredibly tiny, i.e. millionths of a milimeter) volumes at the molecular and cellular  level  need to be examined and understood.

In addition, we also need to understand if and how different radionuclides move in the body (biokinetics). It is pretty obvious that the risk assessement for complex cellular systems  cannot be adopted from studies on external exposure to x-rays or gamma-rays, with a relatively uniform distribution of energy in the tissue. A reliable  model to estimate the combined effects of different types of radiation  has not yet been found.

But all the evidence strongly points to the conclusion that it is the concentration of ionization (its density) in a small group of cells, or even a single cell that defines “risk” at the molecular level, not the bodily dose (more a political consensus than a scientific one)  as Paul  Brown correctly reported in 2004:

The National Radiological Protection Board has always measured a tiny dose received by an individual as if it affected the entire body evenlyso the result was a dilution that appeared to do little harm. The possibility that the dose would lodge near a bone or in the brain and emit radiation inflicting localised damage leading to cancer had not been not accepted.

So all the talks about “background dose” or “safe dose” is meaningless and the absurd claims that below 100 mSv, there is no problem whatsoever and below 200 mSv DNA repair can fix everything (and other absurdities) prove that Allison is a charlatan and I bet 10.000 EUR, that if investigated properly, some connection to the nuclear industry will be found. If Jha had bothered to look at the sources Allison frequently uses, the penny would already have dropped: the US DoE, the NEI, the  NEA, the “Radiation, Science & Health Inc.” (a front group, if there ever was one) and obscure and refuted studies like “Is Chronic Radiation an effective  prophylaxis against cancer?” The man even champions the routine  irradiation of food! (see his website) Allison’s  attempt, to bring the “hormesis myth back to life is obvious, but futile.

The “lack of understanding” of how the body deals with LDIR is the result of ostracizing  independent scientists who represent a danger to the nuclear industry and its unhealthy ties to the military, the great protector of the nuclear holy grail. So any “article” dealing with risks of IR can only make sense if accompanied by “background” about the political agenda behind the “peaceful use of nuclear energy”. The Orwellian character of this charade ought to have been clear from the beginning, with the ludicrous slogan “atoms for peace” which demonstrates that exactly the opposite of Allison’s claim is true: not the “anti-nuclear” lobby created “irrational fear” but the very rational fear of ionizing radiation (a life-preserving instinct since we have no sensory receptor) was ridiculed and the immense risks and uncertainties downplayed, to foster acceptance of an insane technology that threatens all life on earth and has caused a global cancer epidemic (among other diseases).

Since the second world war, scientists have worked on the basis that there is no dose of radiation so low that it’s not dangerous.”

This is complete BS. A quick look at the historical development of the ICRP model shows that for decades the converse view was taken: Based on the extrapolations from Hiroshima, the accepted wisdom was that below a certain threshold, health risks were negligible. The “acceptable” or “permissible” (maximum) dose had to be  adjusted downward again and again as increasing scientific evidence showed that the risks were much higher than originally assumed.

You do have authentic and independent experts on radiation biology (biochemistry) in the UK: among them the courageous Dr. Chris Busby – Why is he not allowed to write in the Guardian or serve as competent advisor on the subject?

Your reports about genetic engineering are also very uncritical …  Political / economic pressure?

The ethical responsibility of the press  to inform the public about these controversial  scientific issues (affecting many generations to come)  is enormous …

Are you up to it with these “reporters” ?

( ….This  comment was sent as reply to the guardian’s “coverage” of the dangers of ionizing radiation….)

Sources:

http://www.protectnv.org/documents/FalsePromises.pdf

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Portal:Nuclear_Issues

http://www.greenaudit.org/

http://www.umrc.net/uranium_basics.aspx

http://www.wise-uranium.org/dissbk.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/nuclear-waste-may-be-used-in-household-products-1269778.html

http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v22/n45/full/1206988a.html

http://www.ratical.com/radiation/CNR/HEIRreports.html

http://www.radiation.org/reading/index.html

http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1243928248447

http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11340

http://www.pnas.org/content/97/10/5381.full.pdf+html

http://www.pnas.org/content/100/9/5057.full.pdf+html

Beyond Treason and « Gulf War Syndrome – Killing Our Own «

<<<<to watch the BT video click on the  image

P.S.  Send Simon Jenkins to Iraq and let him see the deformed babies, the exploding cancer incidence in children, the immense suffering,  for himself. The man is a small-minded idiot: the incredibly stupid assertion that “Nobody makes money from downplaying risk (how about the nuclear industry, eh? – the evidence of a cover-up (just look at the “official” Chernobyl figures) is staring in your face) while at the same time accusing the “anti-nuclear lobby” of  exaggerating risk for personal gain must go down in the history of print as one of the darkest moments of human bias and ignorance …. because people are suffering and dying while Jenkins gets paid for his high  bollocks  turnout …  (remember Asbestos, DDT, PCBs,  – wasn’t it all “safe” ..???!!!)

Fatima, this little girl, was suffering from severe congenital malformations, is – in Jenkins universe, the result of “irrational fears about irradiation”

Tell that to her parents… (Fatima has died in the meantime, she was born with two heads ….) What can one say to express the feelings of outrage and grief?


Remember, this is the result of “Operation Iraqi Freedom” …..

[1] IFJ: “Respect for Truth and for the right of the public to truth is the first duty of the journalist”      Is it in reality?

[2] i.e. Radiation-induced effects in unirradiated cells: A review and implications in cancer, 2002

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Iran – Yellow Cake, Green Salt and Red Herrings

IAEA secret report: Iran worked on nuclear warhead”

one_ring

It is a sad day when even The Guardian is spreading cheap PR (propaganda) to influence public opinion: (Cui bono? Israel, the state of eternal impunity…)

“The urgency of dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat was underscored today when a leaked report revealed that the UN inspection agency believes the Islamic republic has “sufficient information” to make a nuclear weapon and has “probably tested” a key component.

The incendiary and misleading rhetoric in the introduction of this paragraph clearly demonstrates the bias behind it because it uses unproven premises to suggest  that they are proven facts:

Premise 1: Iran seeks nuclear weapons

Premise 2: Iran has a secret programme for developing nuclear warheads

Premise 3: (built on the other two): This represents a “threat” to world peace.

The deduction is made from accepted opinions not from first and true sentences in other words a foregone conclusion: there is an “urgency” to deal with a threat whose existence is only imputed, not proven.

For comparison: Here is an excerpt from a REUTERS article which does not violate the principle of  “balanced” reporting:

“The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.”

Source: Iran nuclear “threat” hyped: IAEA’s ElBaradei

“Managing Perceptions” Not Reporting Facts

“A secret annexe” has been found – give me a break, after the “Yellow Cake” scam and the “Green Salt” scare what it is now – the “Red Herring” (distract attention from the devastating Goldstone report on war crimes in Gaza which has just been released) – or just lie and distort till you are blue in the face?

As I mentioned in my previous post about the Goldstone report, the JTA laments the “bad timing” of the report just as Israel is trying “to convey the impression in Washington that Israel is more open to negotiations than the Palestinians and that the principal threat to the region is Iran” so it is about time we focus media attention on “evil” Iran….. and the guardian obliges with this shabby piece of journalism?

Western diplomats confirmed that the annexe was authentic”.

“Its absolutely accurate,” one official said. “It shows the agency’s thinking, which is that Iran is a lot further along on this than most people think. It suggests the Iranians have done a lot of work.”

The annexe said Iranian scientists had engaged in “probable testing” of explosives arranged in a hemisphere, which is how an implosion-type nuclear warhead is triggered.

There was also evidence, the report says, that Iran had worked on developing a chamber to carry a warhead on top of one of its missiles “that is quite likely to be nuclear”.

Why are the “”Western diplomats” and  the “official” not identified? How did (could) they verify the authenticity of the document? What kind of  journalism is this? Has Julian Borger actually seen the “secret annexe” or is he just “reporting” hearsay? Does it not occur to journalists these days that they might be used for “psyops”- presented to the world as “ independent media reports”? If there is evidence, then show it to the world and publish the document.

Believes”, “Probable “, “quite likely”- what is this – an insinuation exercise? An illustration of Aristotelian and Schopenhauer’s lessons on rhetoric and dialectic?

Why was the IAEA not given a chance to respond to the allegations in the article?  For comparison the AFP reported recently:

IAEA denies report it is sure Iran is seeking bomb

El baradeiVIENNA The UN atomic watchdog said Thursday it has no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapons programme in Iran.

The International Atomic Energy Agency rejected a US media report which claimed its experts believed Tehran had the ability to make a nuclear bomb and was on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead.

“With respect to a recent media report, the IAEA reiterates that it has no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapon programme in Iran,” a statement said.

According to the media report, the proof was contained in a so-called “secret annex” to the IAEA’s latest report on Iran, but was deliberately being withheld by the agency’s director general Mohamed ElBaradei.

“At the board of governors meeting on September 9, Director General ElBaradei warned that continuing allegations that the IAEA was withholding information on Iran are politically motivated and totally baseless,” it said.

Back to the Guardian:

“Attention will now focus on the United Nations in New York next week, where Obama takes the rare step of chairing a security council session in order to generate momentum towards nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and consensus over Iran.”

The US “generating momentum towards nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation” – are you kidding?

Kofi Annan (from a speech at Princeton, November 28, 2006):

“All of the NPT nuclear-weapon states are modernizing their nuclear arsenals or their delivery systems. They should not imagine that this will be accepted as compatible with the npt.

Everyone will see it for what it is: a euphemism for nuclear rearmament . . . By clinging to and modernizing their own arsenals, even when there is no obvious threat to their national security that nuclear weapons could deter, nuclear-weapon States encourage others—particularly those that do face real threats in their own region—to regard nuclear weapons as essential, both to their security and to their status. It would be much easier to confront proliferators, if the very existence of nuclear weapons were universally acknowledged as dangerous and ultimately illegitimate.”

After the invasion of Iraq, the world must have reached the conclusion that striving for nuclear weapons is the only safeguard against US aggression, that it is  far more protective for states (with valuable resources or “strategic” importance) to have nuclear weapons than to renounce them.

The Iraq War has demonstrated that a state without weapons of mass destruction is vulnerable to invasion and occupation. It would be perfectly logical to conclude that Iraq was attacked not because it had weapons of mass destruction but because it had none. This pathological logic will be further confirmed if the United States continues to pursue diplomacy with North Korea but demonizes Iran  and threatens it with sanctions for which there is no legal base.

The estimated number of casualties from the Iraq-Iran war is  one million Iranians. Many were victims of Saddam’s use of chemical weapons (both civilian and military targets). The Iranian nuclear-weapon programme began in the 1980s, perhaps as a response to Iraq’s use of these weapons.

Neither uranium enrichment nor plutonium reprocessing is prohibited under NPT rules, as long as they are under IAEA safeguards. According to a legal adviser[1] to the Foreign Office ‘safeguards are designed to detect diversion of materials for military or unknown purposes. Nothing in the NPT or safeguards agreements legally prevents a state party to them from acquiring nuclear-weapon capability, for example by enriching uranium to high grades, reprocessing spent fuel and so on’.

Iran was a signatory to the NPT from its inception (1-July 1968) but Israel never signed the NPT, nor even admitted that it has nuclear weapons  let  alone let anyone from the IAEA inspect its nuclear facilities. However, as we all must understand:  it’s not the weapons, it’s who has them..

The Bush administration has tried to smear El Baradei and get rid of him but did not succeed (remember the Yellow Cake scam) . Perhaps he was too decent for the job and even had the audacity to point out the double standards of the “international community”?

“We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security—and indeed to continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use.”

Mohamed ElBaradei, NYT, 12 February, 2004

The smear campaign against institutions that do not comply with Israels policies and plans is pretty obvious (see also my last post regarding UNHRC) and the IAEA has been targeted because it did not produce the desired “proof” that Iran is a “threat”( Why do I have a feeling of Dèja Vu? Just remember the accusations against the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq who did not oblige with finding non-existent WMDs…)

Here is an interesting article by Gareth Porter about the latest development in “The laptop of Mass Destruction”-case….

More Sources:

US Iran report branded dishonest (BBC)

Letter from IAEA refuting false allegations in Congressional report

Iran in the Crosshairs (FPIF)

IAEA – Focus Iran – Latest Reports

IAEA Report September 2008


Last words …

As soon as certain topics are raised. the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: Prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.”

George Orwell


[1] D. M. Edwards, ‘International Legal Aspects of Safeguards and the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 1, 1984.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized